[Bug 2055837] Re: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures)
There is a capnproto build failure https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/capnproto/1.0.1-3build1/+build/27871057 that might be also related. I still need to investigate whether it is the case. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837]
FWIW, we've actually seen at least one package seemingly failing to build because of this issue: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/720254657/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-armhf.libflorist_2022.0.1~20220616-5_BUILDING.txt.gz > posix-c.ads:876:07: error: size for "suseconds_t" too small, minimum allowed is 64 I didn't dig into what exactly they're doing there. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837]
(Not that suseconds_t *needs* to be 64-bit to store values from 0 to 99, but there's nothing wrong with it being 64-bit either, it just needs to agree with the type of tv_usec.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837]
(In reply to Joseph Myers from comment #2) > Shouldn't we fix how suseconds_t is defined in glibc in the 64-bit time > case? It's not as if any interfaces in glibc use suseconds_t other than as > part of struct timeval (though we should still warn in NEWS about potential > compatibility issues for any interfaces using suseconds_t in third-party > libraries). That's why I am not fully sure which would be the best way, since this strictly is an ABI break. At least using the timespec trick to keep the type as currently defined should not cause any issue (since the type holds all potential values), and it should be back-portable. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837]
Shouldn't we fix how suseconds_t is defined in glibc in the 64-bit time case? It's not as if any interfaces in glibc use suseconds_t other than as part of struct timeval (though we should still warn in NEWS about potential compatibility issues for any interfaces using suseconds_t in third-party libraries). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837]
Yes, this was an overlook which I am not fully sure how to handle without breaking 'current' 64 time ABI. Maybe we can follow the timespec one, time/bits/types/struct_timespec.h, used 32 bit suseconds_t and add proper paddings depending of the endianess. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837] Re: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures)
Launchpad has imported 1 comments from the remote bug at
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31510.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment
will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about
Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at
https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking.
On 2024-03-19T11:24:14+00:00 Simon Chopin wrote:
POSIX documents struct timeval as follows:
struct timeval {
time_t tv_sec; /* seconds */
suseconds_t tv_usec;/* microseconds */
};
Since bdc4782744df73a8c0559985c54b5b6b9c7a4a74 ("y2038: Add __USE_TIME_BITS64
support for struct timeval") tv_usec can have __suseconds64_t when using 64-bit
time, however suseconds_t is unconditionally typedefed to __suseconds_t.
That leads to the following:
ubuntu@mantic-armhf:~$ cat test.c
#include
#include
#include
int main(void)
{
struct timeval tv;
printf("tv_usec: %d, suseconds_t: %d\n", sizeof(tv.tv_usec),
sizeof(suseconds_t));
assert(sizeof(tv.tv_usec) == sizeof(suseconds_t));
return 0;
}
ubuntu@mantic-armhf:~$ gcc test.c && ./a.out
tv_usec: 4, suseconds_t: 4
ubuntu@mantic-armhf:~$ gcc -D_TIME_BITS=64 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 test.c &&
./a.out
tv_usec: 8, suseconds_t: 4
a.out: test.c:9: main: Assertion `sizeof(tv.tv_usec) == sizeof(suseconds_t)'
failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
We noticed this when running the conformance tests on Ubuntu Noble,
where we've set _TIME_BITS=64 in the default GCC flags as part of the
ongoing t64 transition.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/2055837/comments/1
** Changed in: glibc
Status: Unknown => New
** Changed in: glibc
Importance: Unknown => Medium
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837
Title:
Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures)
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837] Re: understand conform test failures on armhf
** Bug watch added: Sourceware.org Bugzilla #31510 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31510 ** Also affects: glibc via https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31510 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Summary changed: - understand conform test failures on armhf + Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble ** Summary changed: - Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble + Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: Wrong type for timeval.tv_usec on armhf/Noble (and other failures) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837] Re: understand conform test failures on armhf
** Tags added: foundations-todo ** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Simon Chopin (schopin) ** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu) Status: New => Triaged -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: understand conform test failures on armhf To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 2055837] [NEW] understand conform test failures on armhf
Public bug reported: I xfailed a whole stack of the "conform" tests on armhf, which presumably fail because of the change in default size of time_t (and off_t). We should work out what is going on here before release -- maybe leaving them xfail is appropriate but I'm not confident to say that at this time. ** Affects: glibc (Ubuntu) Importance: Critical Status: New ** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Critical -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2055837 Title: understand conform test failures on armhf To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/2055837/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
